1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates generally to safety devices, particularly to devices for reducing or preventing the severity or occurrence of head injuries and more specifically to a mouthguard suitable for do-it-yourself custom fitting.
2. Background History
Mouthguards were first introduced in the 1920's for use in the sport of boxing. Such early mouthguards were formed of pieces of rubber cut to the shape of the maxillary arch and held in place by clenching the teeth together. Since the teeth were required to be clenched to maintain the mouthguard in position, it was difficult if not impossible to achieve oral air flow which was crucial for the purpose of increasing levels of oxygen intake required during physical exertion. Additionally, because the early mouthguards were loose fitting and easily displaced by impact force, there was a significant risk of being dislodged, causing airway obstruction. This proved to be particularly hazardous in the sport of boxing, where there was a likelihood of a participant being rendered unconscious.
A typical improvement in the early rubber mouthguards was illustrated in the patent to CARTHETER, U.S. Pat. No. 2,521,039 which disclosed a rubber mouthguard having a central airway passage. Such mouthguards also interfered with speech since they were kept in place only by biting the teeth together.
Attempts at improving rubber mouthguards led to the introduction of thermoplastics including mouth-formed mouthguards which were immersed in boiling water and then formed in the mouth by using biting pressure. In order to provide effective protection, such mouthguards were required to be centered properly over the dental arch and cover all posterior teeth.
These mouthguards suffered from several disadvantages, including lack of proper extension into the buccal vestibules and to the distal molars. Additionally, athletes were prone to cut the posterior region of such mouthguards because the mouthguards were generally bulky and did not fit well. Shortening the mouthguards, however, resulted in increased chance of injury.
Custom formed mouthguards have been prepared by dentists for their patients. Such mouthguards were molded from casts of the patient's mouth taken after a dental impression had been made. While these mouthguards overcame many of the disadvantages of prior mouthguards such as retention problems, comfort, and interference with speaking and breathing, the procedure for making the mouthguards was time consuming and considerable expense was involved in both material costs and professional fees.
The Applicant herein appreciated that there is a present need for a mouthguard having the benefits of a dentist fitted custom made mouthguard at a lower cost and without the requirement to engage the services of a dental professional.